Don't call it Mobile

[jorabin]

Call it "Contextual and Cross Channel Web Best Practices" (C3W)

[paulirish]

"multi-device" or "cross-device"?

[mathiasbynens]

Just call it “best practices”.

[jorabin]

Assuming:

“Multi-device” refers to the ability to deliver a representation that provides at least a “functional user experience” and preferably a “harmonized user experience” in a range of “delivery contexts” (terms chosen from the still unpublished http://www.w3.org/TR/di-gloss/ )

And “cross-device” refers to the ability of a user meaningfully to start, continue and complete tasks across a number of distinct delivery contexts?

The distinction perhaps being that multi-device is a server centric view and cross-device is a user centric view?

I’m going to argue that “device” is a bit too laden with implications about “phone” “tablet” etc and that thinking forward to a world of distributed clients and servers (IoT and Wearables etc. where it’s uncertain that client and server exist at a single point in the network) it’s preferable to my mind to think about delivery context and "access mechanism” (also from http://www.w3.org/TR/di-gloss/).

That’s why I propose Contextual and Cross Channel - contextual to encompass the idea of user preferences as well as the characteristics of the channels they have chosen (or been forced) to use in the course of carrying out a task.

Not to mention that it appeals to me to have the initialism C3W for Contextual and Cross Channel Web, because it’s W3C backwards.

[jorabin]

Re "Just call it “best practices”. I agree with the sentiment in the sense of “The Web is /for/ Mobile, Stupid!” however, the existence of the Web and Mobile Interest Group is predicated on the assumption that a significant constituency needs to be alerted to a change that happened a while ago.